LDs are not OBEs

[Rudolph]

I guess I've just got a narrower definition of the word dream than most. We've got the word so I figure we might as well use it for a specific thing.

Absolutely! In fact, we need more words. We probably need as many words for the various dream states as the Eskimos have for snow.

Trying to say that the different words refer to the same thing is not helpful, imo.

[Szaxx]

Hi All,
So how much lucidity do you categorise as a dream? The reason is in a ld I can create any scenario and have total control of everything. The only prerequisite I need is to be aware in the dream of the fact that I'm dreaming. Hope that makes sense?
If this is an ap on some level then for many years I've fooled myself its just a dream.

The fascination increases.

[Rudolph]

Anything that manifests in the moment and does not persist in a way that would be present in a future visit or would not be corroborated by a third party wandering through... I would classify more as an LD.

But this can be very complicated because I was in one OBE where I was flying over beautiful countryside at sunrise and I saw some movement below and swooped in for a closer look and saw two wolves actively engaged in separating a mother doe from her fawn and I knew the outcome was pretty much a done deal. But who else could or would corroborate this event?

I think experience with hard astral regions with aspects to them that persist would clarify this. IMO, there are aspects of the astral realm that are not completely illusory. Different people can come by at different times and see the same thing.

I think the AP into an LD is very useful in pursuing personal growth and is not to be discounted.

But lumping full conscious awareness of Higher realms in with LD is not constructive if you ask me.

[Xanth]

Personally, I don't believe what most people refer to as a "dream" is even a real, objective experience.
A "dream" is nothing more than a projection of an unconsciously aware nature.

Honestly speaking, that could be entirely what this Physical Reality "waking life" is. 

[Rudolph]

Personally, I don't believe what most people refer to as a "dream" is even a real, objective experience.

Most people don't think a "dream" is a real, objective experience.


In fact I can't think of anyone who has said that.

[Xanth]

Most people don't think a "dream" is a real, objective experience.


In fact I can't think of anyone who has said that.

Well, not even that really.
It's the average idea of what a "dream" is to people.

[Summerlander]

I know exactly where Xanth is coming from and he is right. In fact, this is one of the reasons why I posted what I did in this link:
http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/welcome_to_astral_projection_experiences/phasing_or_aping-t34253.0.html

[Xanth]

I know exactly where Xanth is coming from and he is right. In fact, this is one of the reasons why I posted what I did in this link:
http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/welcome_to_astral_projection_experiences/phasing_or_aping-t34253.0.html

Well, thank you... but, I would like to point out that I'm really neither right nor wrong... you just agree with me. 

[manwesulimo2004]

Well, thank you... but, I would like to point out that I'm really neither right nor wrong... you just agree with me. 

I agree with you on this. 

[Pauli2]

I found an interesting article which seems to be written by the late
David Scott Rogo (1950 - 1990), author of Leaving the Body.

The article's is in Lucidity Letter 4(2), December, 1985, p. 43.

One interesting observation is:


"...the most consistent finding about the lucid dream is that it occurs within
the context of normal Stage 1 REM sleep. The only exception to this rule is
that some lucid dreams may occur during sleep onset...

...several psychophysiological studies of gifted OBE subjects have in fact been
made. The results indicate that OBEs emerge from a wide variety of brain states,
with no consistency present between the EEG records from one subject to another.

...Gabbard and Twemlow demonstrates that OBEs do not necessarily occur during
clearly-defined sleep. This fact alone should keep us from facilely equating OBEs
with lucid dreams."


Also I should point out that my link to Robert Peterson contained a table from the last
two specialists in the quote above.

So now we have at least 6 skilled persons in this area of OBE studies who describe various
details which indicates that LDs are not OBEs: Buhlman, Waggoner, Peterson, Gabbard & Twemlow
and Scott Rogo.

[Astral316]

^ How did the researchers determine whether test subjects were having an LD or OBE enough to conclude patterns in brain activity?

[Xanth]

I found an interesting article which seems to be written by the late
David Scott Rogo (1950 - 1990), author of Leaving the Body.

The article's is in Lucidity Letter 4(2), December, 1985, p. 43.

One interesting observation is:


"...the most consistent finding about the lucid dream is that it occurs within
the context of normal Stage 1 REM sleep. The only exception to this rule is
that some lucid dreams may occur during sleep onset...

...several psychophysiological studies of gifted OBE subjects have in fact been
made. The results indicate that OBEs emerge from a wide variety of brain states,
with no consistency present between the EEG records from one subject to another.

...Gabbard and Twemlow demonstrates that OBEs do not necessarily occur during
clearly-defined sleep. This fact alone should keep us from facilely equating OBEs
with lucid dreams."


Also I should point out that my link to Robert Peterson contained a table from the last
two specialists in the quote above.

So now we have at least 6 skilled persons in this area of OBE studies who describe various
details which indicates that LDs are not OBEs: Buhlman, Waggoner, Peterson, Gabbard & Twemlow
and Scott Rogo.

You're ignoring (deliberately, mind you) that it doesn't prove the contrary either.  It doesn't even suggest it actually.  It just says, hey, there are different brain waves showing.  That's completely meaningless.

Actually, I could just as easily conclude from their experiments that it DOES prove that OBEs and LDs are the same thing by equating their brain activity with conscious awareness during the experience.  See what I did there?  I made a completely unprovable, random hypothesis just like they did.  THIS IS FUN!

While however, quite CLEARLY, through my own experiences I know that their hypothesis is false.  So meh.

^ How did the researchers determine whether test subjects were having an LD or OBE enough to conclude patterns in brain activity?

I'd also like a response to that question. 

[Stookie_]

Who cares? Just call your LD an LD if you're more comfortable with that. The worst that can happen is you get fined by the astral police and have to go to astral court.

[Rudolph]

You're ignoring (deliberately, mind you) that it doesn't prove the contrary either.  It doesn't even suggest it actually.  It just says, hey, there are different brain waves showing.  That's completely meaningless.

Actually, I could just as easily conclude from their experiments that it DOES prove that OBEs and LDs are the same thing by equating their brain activity with conscious awareness during the experience.  See what I did there?  I made a completely unprovable, random hypothesis just like they did.  THIS IS FUN!

He has not claimed to have "proof". Disagreeing with something no one has said is another common deceptive semantic trick that I see on these forums. Also to state, "that it doesn't prove the contrary" reveals a lack of even an elementary grasp of logic because once again (don't tell me you've never heard this before), 'you can't prove a negative'.

Yes it does say, "there are different brain waves showing".  But to claim "that's completely meaningless" is wrong. It is clearly meaningful. A hypothesis is stated and it is backed up with empirical evidence.

Glad to see you're having fun.

[Astral316]

Is it possible that this has more to do with the way in which the non-physical was entered (ie. consciously vs. becoming lucid after) then it does about the nature of the experience itself? I mean the only thing this is evidence of is that people are in REM sleep when they're dreaming (already known) and stay in that stage after having gone "out of body."

[Summerlander]

I found an interesting article which seems to be written by the late
David Scott Rogo (1950 - 1990), author of Leaving the Body.

The article's is in Lucidity Letter 4(2), December, 1985, p. 43.

One interesting observation is:


"...the most consistent finding about the lucid dream is that it occurs within
the context of normal Stage 1 REM sleep. The only exception to this rule is
that some lucid dreams may occur during sleep onset...

...several psychophysiological studies of gifted OBE subjects have in fact been
made. The results indicate that OBEs emerge from a wide variety of brain states,
with no consistency present between the EEG records from one subject to another.

...Gabbard and Twemlow demonstrates that OBEs do not necessarily occur during
clearly-defined sleep. This fact alone should keep us from facilely equating OBEs
with lucid dreams."


Also I should point out that my link to Robert Peterson contained a table from the last
two specialists in the quote above.

So now we have at least 6 skilled persons in this area of OBE studies who describe various
details which indicates that LDs are not OBEs: Buhlman, Waggoner, Peterson, Gabbard & Twemlow
and Scott Rogo.

You are basing your argument on so\ething you don't understand. People also hallucinate during waking states, Pauli2. It doesn't mean anything. A person can also display rapid eye movement after a dose of exogenous DMT whilst brain waves were on beta mode at the time. Remember, REM is another term we came up with for labelling a specific sleep stage. The fact of the matter is that people constantly dream, even in the waking state one can partially become aware of dreaming (daydreaming). Do you know why? Because the mind is active most of the time, because thoughts are generaated most of the time. Hell, we even dream during delta sleep! Oh yes we do! As for OOBEs...don't believe every piece of bullsnot you find...like vivid dreams, most OOBEs occur in REM.

[Pauli2]

Some of you probably know Stephen LaBerge, Ph. D. The author of Lucid Dreaming
and two (or three) more books (at least one co-authored).

In his second book, LaBerge wrote that OBEs are a form of dream, as he doesn't
believe in any non-physical "astral" phenomena. But...

But Laberge later wrote an article together with Lynne Levitan in the publication
NIGHTLIGHT 3(2-3), 1991, called OTHER WORLDS: OUT-OF-BODY EXPERIENCES AND LUCID DREAMS.

The article relies on many scientists' discoveries like psychologist Susan Blackmore


From the article, which is based on scientific methods & studies:

"...OBEs are quite plainly different from lucid dreams...

...OBEs were more than four times more likely in WILDs than in DILDs.

Proof that some or even most OBEs are dreams is not enough
to allow us to say that a genuine OBE is impossible."


I don't consider the study conclusive, and they also mention that
EEG measurement of brain waves are not an exact method!

This article is old, and I wonder where LaBerge stands today on
the subject of LDs not being OBEs. I guess he still acts from a
purely physical perspective.

The EEG equipment may also have improve over those 20 years

Anyone enlighten me.

[Summerlander]

LMAO!

Nobody said here that genuine OOBEs don't happen. In fact, if you had checked the Lucidity link that I posted especially for you at the start of this thread, you'd know that. The real OOBE thing is still a possibility. But I've also been trying to get people to consider other possibilities.

Btw, Susan Blackmore? Really? Isn't she the parapsychologist who claimed to know for sure that there is no afterlife? I wouldn't call her a scientist. She's worse than Stephen Hawkings she is - and you know what I think of him. I've seen her mug on Newscientist - she's not worthy of being there.

[Xanth]

Y'know what Pauli?  

LaBerge (and the other authors you talk about) very well might be correct in their supposition that LD's are not OBE's.

Honestly, my personal experience and conclusions that I've drawn from them are my own... and I'm firm in my stance that LaBerge and the others are incorrect (in other words you can't convince me otherwise), but really it's my opinion, just as their stance is only their opinion.

I hope that one day we'll have conclusive "PROOF" one way or the other and we can all sit down and say "ooooh, that's how it really is, that's cool!".  

In either case, and as Stookie points out, regardless of the experience... they're all very amazing in every regard.  What people decide to label theirs as is of no consequence to me anymore.  I used to care... I really did, but I don't anymore because I've changed my perspective of the experience.

[Summerlander]

Amen.

[Pauli2]

Btw, Susan Blackmore? Really? Isn't she the parapsychologist who claimed to know for sure that there is no afterlife? I wouldn't call her a scientist. She's worse than Stephen Hawkings she is - and you know what I think of him. I've seen her mug on Newscientist - she's not worthy of being there.

You are probably correct in stating that psychologist researcher Susan Blackmore
doesn't acknowledge the existence of any afterlife. But still, she is a scientist and
as such she has made scientific studies using scientific methods.

Her conclusion is that LDs are different phenomenas than OBEs. I don't think
it matters that she doesn't believe that an OBE is really a paranormal/astral
event.

She has made her research, for example:


Susan Blackmore published in Lucidity Letter 7(1), 1988 an article from the
Proceedings of the European Symposium on Lucid Dream Research titled
Lucid Dreams And OBES (my bolds):


"...this highlights the difference between OBEs and lucid dreams.
It is difficult to have an OBE deliberately because you have to get
the normal model of self out of the way first.

In a survey (Blackmore, 1986) I found that the people who had spontaneous
OBEs tended also to have flying dreams and mystical experiences while those
who had deliberate OBEs were the ones with good dream control skills; able
to stop and start dreams at will, wake themselves up out of dreams or choose
dreams.

Having a lucid dream requires something else again. The problem is not
to get a solid model of self out of the way but rather to create a good enough
one in the first place. Only with a reasonable model of self can you realise that
you are asleep and dreaming. This makes clear the greatest difference between
the waking OBE and the lucid dream - for all their superficial resemblance.

In the OBE the state is constrained by the constant danger of the normal
model of self reasserting itself. It will then take over again as "reality" and
the world of imagination is lost. In contrast the lucid dream is constrained
by the danger of falling back into deeper sleep and losing the tentative
model of self which made the lucidity possible.

The potential of the two states is then quite different.

The OBEr is really in a deeper illusion. She imagines that the world she
sees is the physical world as it would be seen with her eyes open, that is,
she is misled into mistaking a memory model for a sensory one. Research
which seeks for actual astral bodies or paranormal effects in the OBE is
just perpetuating this confusion.

By contrast the lucid dreamer is well aware of the illusory nature of
the dream - indeed it is this which defines the lucidity. However the
OBEr has the greater potential. If only she can see through the illusion
and realize that this is a world of the imagination then anything is possible.
Once free of the constraints of the normal self model it is possible to explore
everything the mind is capable of from complex scenes to complete openness
or emptiness. Meanwhile the lucid dreamer, however lucid, is forever limited
by being asleep."


Interesting.

Blackmore draws the conclusion from her research that because the OBE:er is
perceived as more real, it must therefore be an illusion. I think it interesting that
someone who completely rejects the astral/paranormal actually reaches a
conclusion that LDs are not OBEs.

As Blackmore is a psychologist I guess that she really is interested in the OBE:er
who "realizes" that the OBE is an illusion, and thus the "self" is a creation to
make new fantastic discoveries about the human mind, but from a purely
physical perspective.


I think it's easy to question her conclusions, but anyone reading the result of
her research has to praise her for making keen observations on the differences
between OBEs and LDs.


The list of skilled people grows. They have all noticed that LDs are not OBEs:
Buhlman, Waggoner, Peterson, Gabbard & Twemlow, Scott Rogo, LaBerge,
Levitan and Susan Blackmore.

[Ssergiu]

Okay guys, this is how I define the entire phenomena, from dreams to OOBEs.

   dreams------vivid dreams----lucid dreams---(SP---)OOBE/Wakefulness.

1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19    20.
   <<-------------------------- level of awareness ------------------------->>

The more aware you become the better the entire thing gets. It's enough just to have 3 OOBEs in order to find this out. Of course, in each of them you feel different, but, generally it is the same one thing.

Also, look why it is better to have a nap or pre-sleep before trying an OOBE.
If you attempt when you are sleepy, you start with the level of 1. You will definitely fall asleep. Your body is relaxed, though.
If you start whenever you want, even when you are super aware, like 20, it's kind of hard to go back, isn't it? Also your body is not relaxed.

Now, what would you need? More level of awareness and a relaxed body? You could get that if you wake up in the middle of the entire process:

Have a nap, wake up and try later. When you wake up from your nap, your body obviously is relaxed or primed and you have some high level of awareness as you wake up from or before REM. Let's say 15. That is just perfect for an OOBE.
Also, if you interrupt your sleep, stay up a little and go back, it's still the same.

Now, probably some people would say how come I had an OOBE after I woke up? As you can see 20 is for OOBE OR Wakefulness, if you body is in the "sleep" mode, you can have an OOBE. When I said above, you couldn't go back, it was more because of the body who is not relaxed.

Again, there is a difference between LD and OOBEs, but the only difference is the level of awareness, nothing more. Not always what you see in OOBEs is real and not always what you see in LD's is fake. This is what I have gotten from all my SP's and OOBEs and I don't think there will be something or someone who will be able to change my mind.

[Xanth]

Again, there is a difference between LD and OOBEs, but the only difference is the level of awareness, nothing more. Not always what you see in OOBEs is real and not always what you see in LD's is fake. This is what I have gotten from all my SP's and OOBEs and I don't think there will be something or someone who will be able to change my mind.

I'm a firm believer that it's that "level of awareness" that confuses people the most and is the direct influence upon why people think the experiences are different.  They have problems interpreting the awareness factor, so they break it down in the easiest way for their mind to handle it, into these different categories. 

There is no such thing as a dream.  There's no such thing as a Lucid Dream.  There's no such thing as an Astral Projection or an Out of Body Experience.  None of them exist.  There is only "an experience that doesn't happen in this physical reality frame".  That's ALL that exists.  In my opinion, all other divisions are people misinterpreting the data.

With that said, and as Stookie has said, call it whatever you want.  Call your experience whatever you feel most comfortable calling it... *WE* know what you're referring to.  Eventually, you're going to move beyond labels though.

[Volgerle]

You are probably correct in stating that psychologist researcher Susan Blackmore
doesn't acknowledge the existence of any afterlife. But still, she is a scientist and
as such she has made scientific studies using scientific methods.

A scientist (officially) does not mean being a good and proper scientist. I don't think she is one because she is biased and a bit ego-centric too, (you will note this when you see her in interviews). A combination that does not go along well with open-minded and UN-biased research. Moreover, it seems that due to her own faulty scientific research, she just felt "a bit sore" as a consequence by her own failure and the reaction was then to turn this obvious failure around by this kind of turn she did (out of defiance, in a way).

Since she claims and thinks she did not find enough evidence for the paranormal (which is not quite true, see below link) she kind of did that 180-degree turn and joined the holy skeptics religion, where she is highly praised (as one of "them" and a very rational and "sane" person, as opposed to looneys like us) and often quoted by them now. It seems she feels home now.  

She is not a C.W. Tart, D. Radin, G. Schwartz or R. Sheldrake, who all do and did paranormal research by scientific methods - and get results! She would have liked to be, but she didn't reach it, so she changed course.

So again: As often in the scientific world related to position, recognition, money and getting high within the existing power structures: It's all about career and ego, not about science!!!

Read here (link below):

"So, how does Blackmore reconcile the fact of 7 successful experiments out of 21 with her often-repeated claim that her own research led her to become a skeptic? Simple: results from successful experiments were dismissed as due to flaws in the experiment, yet study quality was simply ignored when the results were nonsignificant. There are many design flaws that can lead to false positive results, but there are also many that can lead to false negatives, such as inadequate sample size (low statistical power), inappropriate sampling, and so forth. Berger writes "Blackmore's database is replete with examples of such flaws (...)
Blackmore's claims that her database shows no evidence of psi are unfounded, because the vast majority of her studies were carelessly designed, executed, and reported, and in Blackmore's own assessment, individually flawed. As such, no conclusions should be drawn from this database.... Blackmore is extremely vocal in decrying psi research in her writings, on television and radio, and before the skeptical advocacy group CSICOP (the Committee for Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal), citing her own work as the basis for her strong convictions. ... [She] has achieved a notable position in the skeptical community based on her conversion from believer to skeptic during her "ten years of negative research." Her insistence to the contrary notwithstanding, I believe that my review of her psi research has achieved a constructive end by showing that her conversion from parapsychologist to CSICOP Fellow had no scientific basis in her own experimental work."

http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/New/Anomali/skeptic_research.html

(although a little off-topic now, here also a very useful reply to her pretty dogmatic book on the brain death theory regarding NDEs: http://www.near-death.com/experiences/articles001.html )

My goodness, what is happening to this forum, lately s.o. even quoted Randi, now Blackmoore ... I'm appalled.  

[Stookie_]

Okay guys, this is how I define the entire phenomena, from dreams to OOBEs.

    dreams------vivid dreams----lucid dreams---(SP---)OOBE/Wakefulness.

1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19    20.
    <<-------------------------- level of awareness ------------------------->>

I know a lot of people go by this, but I've always disagreed with this definition. I believe it's possible to have a high level of awareness in a lucid dream, and a really low/hazy level of awareness in an OBE. Just like in physical consciousness, our level of awareness can vary. Level of awareness and area of consciousness are 2 different things.